NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

Logic isn't something that changes just because you choose to reject it. But the science bulletins in your links are still very interesting and the Times link is particularly good. The LIGO experiment isn't conclusive evidence of gravitational waves, at least not in the sense they're talking about ( as variations in spatial geometry ). It's about as conclusive as the WOW signal is for ETH communication, and even then there is still a major issue with the logic of the interpretation. A shift in the wavelength of light doesn't necessarily mean that space is fluid or curved. It may simply mean that gravitational variations cause light waves to behave in a manner that can be thought of in those particular abstract terms, and the reason why may have nothing to with space actually being curved or fluid.

For example, even if the signal distortion was caused by a gravitational variation rather than a seismic event ( the latter seeming far more likely ), all it means is that the gravitational variation interacted with the materials that the antenna is made of in a manner that caused them to behave in the manner described. There is insufficient reason to jump to the conclusion that spatial geometry itself was affected at all. However the scientists who have to justify spending billions on the project and whose livelihoods are dependent on it might have a different opinion. Billions of dollars and years of confirmation bias have a tendency to do that ... LOL

<blockquote data-quote="Randall" data-source="post: 240776" data-attributes="member: 2682">Logic isn&#039;t something that changes just because you choose to reject it. But the science bulletins in your links are still very interesting and the Times link is particularly good. The LIGO experiment isn&#039;t conclusive evidence of gravitational waves, at least not in the sense they&#039;re talking about ( as variations in spatial geometry ). It&#039;s about as conclusive as the WOW signal is for ETH communication, and even then there is still a major issue with the logic of the interpretation. A shift in the wavelength of light doesn&#039;t necessarily mean that space is fluid or curved. It may simply mean that gravitational variations cause light waves to behave in a manner that can be thought of in those particular abstract terms, and the reason why may have nothing to with space actually being curved or fluid. For example, even if the signal distortion was caused by a gravitational variation rather than a seismic event ( the latter seeming&nbsp; far more likely ), all it means is that the gravitational variation interacted with the materials that the antenna is made of in a manner that caused them to behave in the manner described. There is insufficient reason to jump to the conclusion that spatial geometry itself was affected at all. However the scientists who have to justify spending billions on the project and whose livelihoods are dependent on it might have a different opinion. Billions of dollars and years of confirmation bias have a tendency to do that ... LOL</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Randall, post: 240776, member: 2682"] [FONT=Arial][SIZE=4]Logic isn't something that changes just because you choose to reject it. But the science bulletins in your links are still very interesting and the Times link is particularly good. The LIGO experiment isn't conclusive evidence of gravitational waves, at least not in the sense they're talking about ( as variations in spatial geometry ). It's about as conclusive as the WOW signal is for ETH communication, and even then there is still a major issue with the logic of the interpretation. A shift in the wavelength of light doesn't necessarily mean that space is fluid or curved. It may simply mean that gravitational variations cause light waves to behave in a manner that can be thought of in those particular abstract terms, and the reason why may have nothing to with space actually being curved or fluid. For example, even if the signal distortion was caused by a gravitational variation rather than a seismic event ( the latter seeming far more likely ), all it means is that the gravitational variation interacted with the materials that the antenna is made of in a manner that caused them to behave in the manner described. There is insufficient reason to jump to the conclusion that spatial geometry itself was affected at all. However the scientists who have to justify spending billions on the project and whose livelihoods are dependent on it might have a different opinion. Billions of dollars and years of confirmation bias have a tendency to do that ... LOL[/SIZE][/FONT] [/QUOTE]

Verification